I'm wondering if the introduction of the review system will cause a big drop in the number of main umpire overrules on line calls like it did in tennis when Hawkeye was introduced.
Even more interesting is if you have all your challenges left at the end of the match, in order to take a breather and use it to challenge call that in your favour. No rule against that, is it? What I would also like is for both the server and receiver to challenge the high service faults as well.
Currently in tennis, each player is allowed max 3 incorrect line call challenges per set. If unused, they cannot be carried over to the next set. And why would the receiver challenge the high service faults?
To challenge the high services from your opponent that the service judge allowed. Especially the flip one that already got you wrong footed anyway, why not try your luck and see what the match umpire think if the service judge keep allowing it.
Given that the height rule laid down by BWF is that line at bottom rib, You would need take an xray shot at every serve for a confirmation. Sounds expensive and it's against the players human rights
Not if they all signed up for that, as if. Btw, are they still looking for match umpires for that boring job to look over all those x-ray camera shots? I'm in.
Nah, you guys, haven't you heard of those Xray vision glasses that when worn can see thru anything... I remember those when I was a kid ...
No, no x-ray is needed. The service judge calls service faults today without having access to x-ray pictures, right? So this is what the chair umpire must do as well when he/she reviews the slo-mo challenge.
It's funny how history tends to repeat itself. I'm sure many of us who also follows tennis remembers the classic overrule in the Us Open 2004 QF between Serena Williams and Jennifer Capriati. The epic moment can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-27jN1mDuMU This was the call that really pushed the entry of Hawk-eye into tennis. Funny thing is a very similar overrule was just made in Saturday's semifinals of the China masters between Wang Shixian and Porntip Buranaprasertsuk. The chair umpire overruled a shuttle by WSX so obviously in, in the exact same place of the court as in the tennis match. So from this we can assume that the far side-line is very difficult to see clearly from the umpire position and that they should rather not try to overrule on that line. This happens also in my lower-league matches where the person keeping the score also wants to "play umpire" and call shots in or out on the far sideline or on the baseline. Me as a player has a much better view and I want to call it myself.
It's not a visable line though so the call would be just as worthy without replay so no point. Still just a guess basically either way with or without replay, no point in delaying play for that.
I can't wait for all this to be implemented. I just hope they find a way to do this in a timely manner (about 20 seconds for the entire challenge process) People have mentioned using the challenges to buy time when the shot was not even in. Tennis players do this all the time for a quick physical or mental break. Most often tennis players use it when they're mentally rattled and need to calm down and need a breather. You can bet we'll see this in badminton as well because it becomes a tactic through the systems manipulation you can't get around. It may not be popular with the crowd if players do this but thankfully the challenges are only two unsuccessful ones per match so the disruption will be very limited. I wonder what the cost of this all this is and if they will be on TV courts only. It makes sense for only certain courts to save costs because mind you, only a select group of tennis players get to take advantage if hawk eye because it is only used on the big courts with the high ranked/more famous players playing. And this is despite the oodles of money tennis makes more than badminton.
I do agree, I see your point. But sometimes a service is definitely too high but the service judge just doesn't call it for some reason. Sometimes the player elevates the racket and shuttle just before delivering the serve and it could go unnoticed. In these instances the opponents could ask for a challenge, and the chair umpire would look at a replay of the serve and make the final call. Of course the play would have to be stopped when asking for this challenge, so if the umpire doesn't agree then it's a lost point. So the receiver would have to be really sure. It could never be used as a delay tactic.
Sounds nice, but borderline challenges would be made, so after going to the delay/disturbance of a vid replay and still they judged it wrongly(someone could more deeply analyse the video with more time to proof it) It would raise massive questions over the use/cost/value of it. It would be easy to set up and get right for fixed height though if they changed.
I don't think there would be much extra costs, since this technique will be implemented for line review anyway, so it would just be one extra camera for the serve. And borderline challenges would not be wise since the umpire would most likely go with the service judge, and that would mean a point lost. But of course also the server must be allowed to challenge his own faulted serve. So here we do have the possibility of a delay tactic. You have lost the point anyway, so why not try to challenge? Worst case scenario you lose a challenge, but you buy some time. Bottom line is with only two faulty challenges per MATCH, one would have to think very carefully when to use them. There are probably better ways to delay the game if one really wants to. One can "fall" and put hand on the floor so court has to be mopped. Or one can pull a Sun Yu and simply take your knee bandage off and sit down and wait for doctor. :crying:
Feel like I'm spamming the thread but just have to correct myself... That crazy overrule happened in the China Open QF, Wang Shixian vs Ratchanok Inthanon. It's actually quite hilarious. Lucky WSX was leading so big, she could afford to react with a crazy face, then cute smile and laugh. If you missed it see it here at 49:50, scoreline 18-6 2nd set: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3MPkUqvIWc
^ lol... hopefully a photographer took a pic of her reaction... it was cute like "are you serious?!". fortunately she can afford to "donate" a point away. btw this is the same ump who called receiver fault on Hoon 3x! in the match against Cai/Chai.
It has long been the wish of both players and fans alike that challenges on line calls are necessary to verify their truth or otherwise and to get rid of biased judgements, which could make a difference between winning or losing. On the negative side, players may use this option to delay play, to get a breather and to regain their composure. But as elaborated here, there are other ways too to 'steal' time such as fake diving and the request to wipe the floor. Ideally too, there should be a similar system to verify calls on service faults, particularly those relating to serving above the "waist" and racket not pointing downwards when contacting the shuttle. As pointed out it is very difficult to pinpoint the waist of each player as size and height are different and the lowest rib is invisible to the service judge since that particular body area is covered and not exposed. Maybe we need to wait much longer to resolve this issue on service. Right now we still have to rely on the "imagination" of the service judge and hope he/she is not too carried away. And hopefully this service judge is from a neutral country to avoid unnecessary criticsm. As for line calls, maybe to prevent unnecessary delay, challenges can be limited to say five maximun in a match, whether such calls are genuine or not. In other words, players can resort to a maxinum of five dubious challenges and hopefully their two correct challenges are among the five.
If their challenges are correct, then they can have 100 or 5000 more challenges as long as they're all correct. Cool huh?
Very tough job for the umpire and the organizers as it will turn out to be an argument competition instead.
Won't be an argument or a problem if the ump or line judges were correct and did their job properly. After 2 wrong challenges, then no more challenges. Although now I wonder, how many challenges in doubles? 2 per player per match? That's 4 per pair?